Writing Exercise: Do you agree with Galileo?

Writing Exercise: Do you agree with Galileo?. Writing Exercise: Do you agree with Galileo?.

Objectives:
Practice expressing your ideas clearly and concisely in writing.
Practice critical thinking by evaluating theories and constructing your own argument.
Demonstrate knowledge of key concepts and arguments in Epistemology including indirect realism, idealism, materialism, primary and secondary qualities.
Critique your own argument.
Resources (found in Modules: Personal Identity, Overview).
Refer to Stich Chapter 6
DO NOT USE THE INTERNET OR OTHER OUTSIDE SOURCES FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT. USE ONLY THE TEXT. IF YOU USE OUTSIDE SOURCES YOU, WILL HAVE TO REDO THE ASSIGNMENT.
Task:
Write an essay of at least 5-6 paragraphs that address the following questions:
In The Assayer, Galileo wrote: “If living creature were removed, [tastes, odors, and colors] would be wiped away and annihilated.” Galileo is suggesting that if there weren’t any animals or people with senses such as tasting, smelling and seeing, then there would be no such thing as tastes, odors, or colors. These properties or qualities are wholly dependent on there being creatures to perceive them.
Questions: 1. What would John Locke say about this? Would he agree with Galileo? Why or Why not? 2. Would George Berkeley agree? Why or Why not? 3. Do you agree? why or why not?
Use the template below for your answer.
Template:
The basic signposting in your response is: (do not number paragraphs)
(1) In your introductory paragraph explain the Galileo’s idea briefly to your reader who does not know the case. [Focus on relevant details you will need to support your position.]
(2) At the end of your introductory paragraph state your thesis. I ________, because ________. [Fill in the blank with (1) “agree with Galileo that without living creatures tastes, odors, and colors would not exist” or (2) “Disagree with Galileo. Tastes, odors, and colors would exist without any living creatures to perceive them.”
(3) In your next paragraph introduce John Locke to your reader. Then write, John Locke would ______ . Fill in the blank with (a) “agree with Galileo because…” or (b) “disagree with Galileo because…” [Explain why Locke would agree or disagree with Galileo. You should include a definition and explanation of indirect realism. It should also include definitions and an explanation of Locke’s primary vs secondary quality distinction. You will probably need at least two paragraphs for this part of the paper. If you explain Locke’s theory you also should define and explain indirect realism as well as Primary and Secondary qualities. Use examples.]
(4) In the next section introduce George Berkeley to your reader. Then write, George Berkeley would ______. Fill in the blank with (a) “agree with Galileo because…” or (b) “disagree with Galileo because…” [explain why Berkeley would agree or disagree with Galileo. You should include definitions of materialism and idealism, and an explanation of how these ideas apply to Galileo’s claim.
(5) In the last section of your paper explain why you agree or disagree with Galileo. You must support your view with an argument. You could use ideas from Locke or Berkeley or explain why you think they are mistaken. Start this section by reminding the reader what your view is, then offer supporting reasons for why your reader should accept your view.
Professional Writing Tips:
Include citations in every paragraph as (author, year, page number). Include bibliography at the end.
* Do NOT use the internet. Use the Stich and Donaldson or chapter only. Use of the internet will result in a failing grade.
* Write in essay style with paragraphs that connect with signposting. Keep your paragraphs separate (write one topic per paragraph).
* See MLA helpsheet Download MLA helpsheet
or APA citation HELPSHEET .pdf Download APA citation HELPSHEET .pdffor how to include citations and bibliography.
*Explain short quotes fully. See Professional Writing: Quotations
*Explain sufficiently and clearly, as if you were conversing with a stranger who has not read the material. See Professional Writing Skills: Structure
*Write your essay in a word processor to save your work. Paste your essay into the “reply” box in the Discussion post.
Criteria for Success:Your essay will be evaluated on structure, sufficient explanation of your argument, accuracy of your explanation of a concepts in epistemology, and professionalism including grammar and citation/ bibliography. Click the Gear in the upper left to see a rubric for the assignment.

done
Seen
5 mins ago[supanova_question]

Instructions: Your original post should be between 600-625 words. You will

Instructions: Your original post should be between 600-625 words. You will not respond to a peer for this post. You must cite the reading at least five times.

Prompt: Analyze and critique this week’s article. Why, according to the author, do so many people believe in conspiracies? Is he correct? Do you personally believe that conspiracy theories are a danger to contemporary society? Why or why not? What makes conspiracy theorizing different from the activity of philosophical analysis?[supanova_question]

[supanova_question]

Philosophy Question

Writing Exercise: Do you agree with Galileo? Philosophy Assignment Help Hello, I have a quiz I’m going to take the exam and send pictures but I want someone good at it. Because I always hire Tutors and they’re give me bad grades. I should get at less over 89 to pass the courses so please make sure you are good on it. it is 41 questions but there is no answer online. the most question is multiple. I upload the topics please I want someone who knows a really good about Philosophy.
[supanova_question]

Martin Heidegger’s concept of ‘Gestell’ claim that it is too totalizing. Do you agree or disagree? Make an argument by close reading Heidegger’s text(s) and at least one other course text from the first five weeks.

Your answers should demonstrate serious, ongoing engagement with course themes. Each answer should be 600-750 words.
The questions are not simply about retention and regurgitation. They are about thinking. Each invites you to use course themes and texts to reflect, synthesize, and theorize. Superior answers will show an ability to move beyond rehashing ideas from readings and lectures and will instead show creative, critical, and independent thought. Do more than generalize or opine. We are looking for arguments, not assertions. Be as specific and precise in your answers as possible. Stay within the course (unless asked to find an external example). Refer to course texts and cite accordingly (author, title, page number is fine). Do not plagiarize from online sources; any paper found to be over-reliant on such sources will receive an F. Make sure to proofread your answers for spelling and grammar.
[supanova_question]

[supanova_question]

Writing Exercise: Do you agree with Galileo?

Writing Exercise: Do you agree with Galileo?

engineering philosophy

engineering philosophy. engineering philosophy.

read the essay and Talk about who or what is responsible for the situation, how we should hold them responsible, and how similar issues should be dealt with in the future. What are the most important lessons you take away from your case? Why is your case important to engineering ethics? Optional: You might also discuss how the ethical theories we’ve developed in class applies to your case.
[supanova_question]

topic from the list below and do the following: (1) Briefly state the issue: What is the problem you are discussing? For example, briefly outline the debate surrounding abortion (3-4 sentences). You can assume I am familiar with the topics listed below, so you can be brief! (2) Take a position on the issue: What is your point of view? For example, “While I am against abortion, I argue that abortion should be allowed in a limited number of cases (rape, incest, age of mother) and only up to 14 weeks into pregnancy.” You should state your position in one sentence! This is the most important part of the paper, as a strong thesis makes your paper much easier to write, because it directs the development of your argument. Your paper must have a thesis statement! 3) Provide premises in support of your position: Why do you believe your position is correct?

For example you can argue that a 14-week limit is justified by discussing the development of the fetus at that stage. You need two to three (2-3) premises in support of your position! (4) Each premise should be followed by a paragraph discussing the premise and how it supports your position: Why do you believe the premise is correct and how does it relate to your point of view? Given the length of your paper (2 pages), the paper does not need a conclusion. Also, you should not consult any outside sources when writing the paper, the aim of the assignment is for you to develop your own arguments (premises) in support of your own point of view (thesis statement)! You can choose from the following topics: The death penalty. Free health care for all. Same-sex marriage. Affirmative action programs. Gun control. Special: Coronavirus – As your position (thesis statement), state one measure that you think is good (or bad) to fight the virus or the socioeconomic consequences (e.g., unemployment, social distancing). As your premises, provide and discuss reasons to back up your point of view. The paper must be written in the following format: font “Calibri,” font size 12, line spacing 1.5, and normal page margins (1″ on each side). You should not include any identifying information! You can simply start with the title at the top of the page. Once you upload the paper, I can see it is yours in D2L.[supanova_question]

Death With Dignity Scenario and Reflection

engineering philosophy Philosophy Assignment Help In the scenario assignments, you are asked to reflect on responses to the presented scenario. It should not just be writing down your first reaction or what you already know.
Reflection involves critical thinking, which means rethinking your existing knowledge and previously held opinions in light of what we have learned about theories of ethics, logic, and reasoning. You will need to question your current knowledge and beliefs.
Discuss the main points of the debate, what stance you take, support that stance, and discuss the opposing argument. Also discuss an ethical theory that would apply to defend your view.
To complete each scenario assignment:
Complete the entire scenario.
Compose your reflection in a Word document and be sure to address, at a minimum, the following questions:Why do you feel the way you do about the issue presented?
Of the four responses offered in the scenario, which do you think is the most ethical and why?

Support your conclusions with evidence and specific examples from the textbook, including a minimum of one theory of ethics to defend your stance.
Your reflection must be 1-2 pages in length and follow APA formatting and citation guidelines as appropriate, making sure to cite at least two sources.
( I can not attach the scenario but I have attached the transcript so you get the idea of the scenario.)
[supanova_question]

what do you think about philosophy?

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT PHILOSOPHY? [supanova_question]

engineering philosophy

engineering philosophy

250 words each question.

250 words each question.. 250 words each question..

1. Cartesian dualism is the thesis that minds and bodies are made up of distinct substances that nonetheless interact. What is the best objection to Cartesian dualism? 2. Matrialism (a.k.a. physicalism) is the thesis that everything that exists is physical. What is the best objection to physicalism? 3. Cartesian dualists have sometimes claimed that only they can explain how humans have free will. Why is that?[supanova_question]

1.one summery 2.Two Philosophical Discussion Points

I need help to write a summary from pages 205-302
Then write Two Philosophical Discussion Points about the whole reading
while writing, citation for each sentence used should included (write the page number)
I will provide the book pages and other helpful instructions.

done
Seen
2 mins ago[supanova_question]

Answer THREE of the questions listed below.

250 words each question. emergency-planning-2/”>Philosophy Assignment Help Answer THREE of the questions listed below. The three question response posts must have a minimum of 200 words each and must directly quote and properly cite (using MLA format) from the assigned textbook readings. I expect substantive and scholarly posts which evince an understanding of the complex chapter readings. Failure to meet the above criteria will result in a point deduction. For the in-text citation, just put the name of the philosopher whose text you are citing in parentheses followed by the publication year of the e-book (2020). Here’s an example: (Plato, 2020).
Nietzsche
1. If Nietzsche were alive today, would he describe the contemporary United States as being governed by master morality or slave morality? Explain, and be specific.
Ortega y Gasset
3. Do you agree with Ortega’s claim that we are (as of 1929, when he wrote The Revolt of the Masses) living in what he calls a hyperdemocracy? Explain.
Sartre
5. What does Sartre mean when he says “existence precedes essence”? Do you think this is a correct characterization of the human condition? Why or why not?
[supanova_question]

Philosophy Question

Career Ready 360 Custom 360 is a multi-rater assessment that will allow you to collect and reflect on the 8 competencies that employers most desire from new graduates- Problem Solving, Communications,Teamwork, Work Ethic, Digital Application, Leadership, Career Management, Intercultural Fluency.
You will be completing an assessment for yourself as well as inviting raters from the categories of Manager,Peer,Direct Report, Others,Customer,Faculty to get a 360-degree view of these 8 competencies.
You can use the perspectives collected on these 8 competencies to create and execute a Personal Development Plan to help you be Career Ready 360 upon graduation.
1. Career Readiness Assessment 5 points for self-assessment
2. Additional 10 points if 3 additional raters complete CRA

done
Seen
few seconds ago[supanova_question]

https://anyessayhelp.com/ Answer THREE of the questions listed below. The three question response posts must have a minimum of 200 words each and must directly quote and properly cite (using MLA format) from the assigned textbook readings. I expect substantive and scholarly posts which evince an understanding of the complex chapter readings. Failure to meet the above criteria will result in a point deduction. For the in-text citation, just put the name of the philosopher whose text you are citing in parentheses followed by the publication year of the e-book (2020). Here’s an example: (Plato, 2020).
Nietzsche
1. If Nietzsche were alive today, would he describe the contemporary United States as being governed by master morality or slave morality? Explain, and be specific.
Ortega y Gasset
3. Do you agree with Ortega’s claim that we are (as of 1929, when he wrote The Revolt of the Masses) living in what he calls a hyperdemocracy? Explain.
Sartre
5. What does Sartre mean when he says “existence precedes essence”? Do you think this is a correct characterization of the human condition? Why or why not?
[supanova_question]